into the Bergen Book, more in accord with criticisms which had been made. This was in March to May, 1577. Andreæ had made an epitome of the Torgau Book, which the same theologians now revised and approved. In the Bergen Book the traces of Philipism almost totally disappeared. It was hastily signed by many. Objections which had been made known after the signatures THE FORMULA of such large numbers had been attached could only OF CONCORD. be noticed in a preface, which was prepared at the convention in Smalcald, in 1578, and Jüterbock in January and June, 1579. In February, 1580, the final Formula of Concord was adopted at the convent of Bergen, and on June 25, 1580, the fiftieth anniversary of the Augsburg Confession, it was solemnly published at Dresden by Elector Augustus. It had been signed by fifty-one princes and lords, thirty-five cities, and about nine thousand theologians. There were, however, many who for various reasons declined to subscribe, including Schleswig-Holstein, Hesse, Pomerania, Anhalt, and Silesia, together with the cities of Frankfort-on-theMain, Spires, Worms, Magdeburg, Nuremberg, Nordhausen, and Strasburg. Duke Julius of Braunschweig became offended and refused to sign because he had been censured for allowing his three sons to receive emoluments at the hands of the Roman Catholic Church. The king of Denmark refused to allow its publication in his realm, and with his own hand threw two richly-bound copies, sent him by his sister, the electress of Saxony, into the chimney fire. The Formula of Concord became an apple of discord. Its adoption and promulgation, though enacted with good intentions, was a high-handed act. It violently interdicted free thought, and gave the Lutheran Church for a long time to come THE FORMULA a direction as truly dogmatic and uncharitable as the Roman Church from which it had sprung.' But the worst feature of all was the confirmation of the division between Calvinism and Lutheranism. The predestinarianism of the Formula of Concord and of Calvinism were but slightly different, but the divergence was found in the doctrine of the Lord's Supper and in the practical features of church life. Yet the Lutherans openly professed themselves more favorable to Romanism than to Calvin 1 Wilhelm Kabe, in a recent small work, says that the Reformation produced no sentiment in favor of confessional equality, and attributes the spirit of tolerance now prevalent to the idea of natural right which sprang from Humanism.-Ueber Parität, pp. 7, 9. Such facts as we have given might seem to substantiate his conclusion; but in the Reformation intolerance was accidental, while in Romanism it was embodied as a principle. ism. A little later Nicholas Krell, the jurist, whom Elector Christian I of Saxony had made chancellor, was arrested under the regency of Duke Frederick William, and charged with having tried to seduce his master to Calvinism. Because he had favored the claims of Henry IV of Navarre to the French throne Krell was also accused of conduct prejudicial to the emperor, and was beheaded in 1601. Crypto-Calvinism had been completely stamped out.' Within the ranks of the orthodox Lutherans, as judged by the Formula of Concord, there was, however, not perfect peace. That document had left the question as to reconciliation between the doctrines of particular election and universal grace unsolved. It became customary to lay the blame of perdition upon the soul it FURTHER NARIAN DISPUTES. self. A modification of this view was attempted by Samuel Huber, a Lutheran pastor in Wittenberg. He undertook to place alongside of the doctrine of grace that of universal election, and by yielding the doctrine of an effectual call placed the entire responsibility of the actual reception of the benefits of this election upon the believing or unbelieving spirit of the individual. In the effort to refute this position Ægidius Hunnius was compelled to take the view that God decided upon the election or reprobation of a soul, on the ground of his own foreknowledge of the individual's attitude toward the Gospel. But since the doctrine of original sin forbade the possibility that an unconverted soul should in its own strength put faith in God, he maintained that the soul was responsible merely for the attention and submissiveness with which it gave heed to the word as declared. If the sinner put no obstacles in the way of the word, but gave heed thereto, he would be saved. Hunnius was adjudged correct and Huber was deposed. More idle and more bitter was the dispute between the theologians of Giessen and Tübingen. The former held that in his humility Christ had emptied himself voluntarily of some of his divine attributes (Kenosis); the latter that he did not empty himself of them, but hid them (Krypsis). By electoral decision the former was proclaimed as essentially true, and this doctrine was taught in Saxony. In Hesse-Darmstadt the same doctrine was officially promulgated. The decision was reached in . 1624. The progress of the Thirty Years' War overshadowed the protests of the Tübingenites. 1 See an extensive account in Möller, who, however, evidently desires to apologize for the severity of the strict Lutherans-iii, 262-272. The account in Gieseler, with the usual invaluable notes, should not be overlooked. iv, 481-483. LITERATURE: PROGRESS OF CALVINISM IN GERMANY. 1. Göbel M. Geschichte des christlichen Lebens in der rheinisch-westphälischen evangelischen Kirche. 3 vols. Coblenz, 1852–62. Marbg., 1853. 2. Die Einführung der Verbesserungspunkte, 1604-1610. 3. Krenkel. Wie wurden Preussens Fürsten reformirt? 4. Heppe, H. Kirchengeschichte beider Hessen. 2 vols. Ebd., 1876-78. 5. Keller, L. Die Gegenreformation in Westfalen und am Niederrhein, 1555-1585. Leipz., 1881. 6. Bezold, F. von. Briefe des Pfalzgrafen Johann Casimir, 1576–1582. Münch., 1882. 7. Duncker, H. Anhalts Bekenntnisstand vom 1570-1606. Dessau, 1892. 8. Van Meer. De Synode te Emden. The Hague, 1892. 9. Siedersleben, W. Geschichte der Union in der evangelischen Landeskirche Anhalts. Dessau, 1894. 10. Landwehr, H. Die Kirchenpolitik Friedrich Wilhelms des grossen Kurfürsten. Berl., 1894. THE HEIDELBERG CATECHISM. For text see Collections of Creeds by Niemeyer, Leipz., 1840; Heppe, Elb., 1860; Schaff, N. Y., 1877; and No. 4 below. 1. Van Alpen, H. S. Geschichte und Litteratur des Heidelberg Katechismus. 3 vols. Frankf. a. M., 1800. 2. Nevin, John W. History and Genius of the Heidelberg Catechism. Chambersb., Pa., 1847. Best in English.-Schaff. 3. Champendall, H. Examen critique des catéch, de Luther, Calvin, Heidelberg, etc. Gen., 1858. 4. The Heidelberg Catechism in German, Latin, and English, with an historical introduction. N. Y., 1863. 5. Tercentenary Monument. In Commemoration of the Three Hundredth Anniversary of the Heidelberg Catechism. Chambersb., Pa., 1863. Twenty essays by eminent theologians. 6. Wolters, A. Der Heidelberger Katechismus in seiner ursprunglichen Gestalt. Bonn, 1864. 7. Bethune, G. W. Expository Lectures on the Heidelberg Catechism, with Introd. and App. of Literature. 2 vols. N. Y., 1864. 8. Koopman, W. De Heidelberger Catechismus. Emd., 1885. 9. Müller, T. De Heidelberger Catechismus. Sieg., 1888. 10. Gooszen, M. A. De Heidelbergsche Catechismus. Textus receptus met toelichtende Teksten. Leiden, 1890. An able book, with valuable Introductions and Commentary. See N. M. Steffens in Presb. and Ref. Rev., iii, 350. De Heidelbergsche Catechismus en het Boekje van de breking des broods, in het jaar 1563–1564. Leyd., 1893. See Presb. Ref. Rev., ▼, 711. The best translation of Ursinus's Commentary is by G. W. Williard, Columbus, 1852, with Introd. by J. W. Nevin. See the Heidelberg Cat. in Mercersburg Rev., 1852 (iv, by J. W. Nevin); the Church System and the Heid. Cat. in the same, 1857 (H. Harbaugh); the art. by Dr. Harbaugh on the literature of the Catechism in the same for October, 1860; and on its Formation and Introd. into the Palatinate, in the same, xi, 47. See also Otto Thelemann, Aids to the Heid. Cat., transl. Reading, Pa., 1896. THE GERMAN REFORMED CHURCH. 1. Mayer, Lewis. History of the German Reformed Church. Phila., 1851. 2. Harbaugh, H. and D. Y. Heisler. The Fathers of the Reformed Church in Germany and America. 5 vols. Lancaster and Reading, 1857-81. 3. Dubbs, J. H. Historical Manual of the Reformed Church. Lancas., 1885. 5. Good, J. I. The Origin of the Reformed Church in Germany. Reading, Pa., 1887. Hist. of the Reformed Church of Germany, 1620-1890. Reading, 1894. Two of the most valuable contributions to Church History ever made by an American. For selections from the extensive lit. of the Hist. of the Reformed Church in Germany see the first part of J. H. Dubbs's Bibliog. in his Hist. of the Reformed Church, Germany, in the American Ch. Hist. Series, vol. viii, N. Y., 1895, pp. 214, 215. CHAPTER II. PROGRESS OF CALVINISM IN GERMANY. OPEN and avowed Calvinism, however, continued to make rapid progress. This was not a little furthered by the accession of the Philipists, who, but for the Formula of Concord, might have become a means of uniting the Calvinists and Lutheran branches of the Church. Notwithstanding, the Reformed doctrine, as it was called in distinction from the Lutheran, made its chief gains in the western portions of Germany, where the civilization and cultivation were of a higher type, and among the higher classes of the eastern portion.' IN THE As long as Frederick III lived, the Palatinate electorate was Philipist and even Calvinistic in sentiment. Olevianus and Ursinus prepared and published (1563) the Heidelberg Catechism. Yet while Frederick was so decidedly Calvinistic, MORE ALTERchiefly owing to the excessive zeal of the extreme Lu- NATIONS therans, he favored a military union of all the Protes- PALATINATE. tant States. His son, Louis VI, strongly Lutheran, deposed the Calvinistic theologians and preachers to the number of about five hundred, and reintroduced the strict Lutheran forms in connection with the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper. His brother, John Casimir, however, was a strong Calvinist, and in his cities of Kaiserslautern, Neustadt, and Brockelheim the refugees found a place of resort. Upon the death of Louis VI, in 1583, John Casimir became regent and guardian for his minor nephew in the Palatine. He at first claimed a church in Heidelberg for the Reformed, and forbade the preachers to accuse each other of heresy in the pulpit. His attempts to give both parties a place in his do mains were opposed by the Lutherans, and as a result he deposed them and appointed only Reformed as members of the ecclesiastical council. A farcical colloquy resulted in a victory for the Reformed party. John Casimir now proceeded to depose about four hundred ministers. Upon his death, in 1592, Frederick IV, at the age of eighteen, took the government into his own hands. He was of the Reformed faith, which he established in his realms. Like his 'Comp. Möller, iii, 273. The name Reformed soon came to carry with it the implication that the Lutherans were not reformed. |